Perg ranks

[Rienna]

No.

Why? 2 reasons...

Firstly, because, as most of us know, rank is not a true reflection of power in the game - hasn't been for the best part of 3 years or so - so why should someone be removed from perg because of their rank? If someone in perg with less than 35 mill (or whatever) army is ranked 1, it just goes to show how silly the game and rankings have become when all those with armies in excess of 100 and 200 million can drop their rank easily - that is the mockery of the game, not perg!

Secondly, it could be exploited as a tactic - somebody might be in perg for legit reasons but, if this suggestion was applied, could be forced out by an opposing alliance by them purposely dropping their rank. Therefore the person in perg's rank increases, taking them beyond the rank limit, and they are auto-kicked as a result, when the opposing alliance are then free to rebuild and attack at leisure. This would mean that getting removed from perg is potentially beyond the account owners control - and while I understand why the suggestion was made, I must oppose it.

The problem lies in why and how perg was introduced in the first place, and the ludicrously unmeaningful ranking system - all creating new parameters for being kicked out does is create new problems, rather than actually solving the existing ones.

I very strongly agree with this.

Secondly, if it must stay, NO G&R points in purg, how can you acheive "glory" or "reputation" while hiding? Also, unrank all purg accounts. Why are they ranked if they are hiding? All accounts in purg get the same rank so all raiding is =.

And I very strongly agree with this too.

[Iƒrit]

No.

Why? 2 reasons...

Firstly, because, as most of us know, rank is not a true reflection of power in the game - hasn't been for the best part of 3 years or so - so why should someone be removed from perg because of their rank? If someone in perg with less than 35 mill (or whatever) army is ranked 1, it just goes to show how silly the game and rankings have become when all those with armies in excess of 100 and 200 million can drop their rank easily - that is the mockery of the game, not perg!

Secondly, it could be exploited as a tactic - somebody might be in perg for legit reasons but, if this suggestion was applied, could be forced out by an opposing alliance by them purposely dropping their rank. Therefore the person in perg's rank increases, taking them beyond the rank limit, and they are auto-kicked as a result, when the opposing alliance are then free to rebuild and attack at leisure. This would mean that getting removed from perg is potentially beyond the account owners control - and while I understand why the suggestion was made, I must oppose it.

The problem lies in why and how perg was introduced in the first place, and the ludicrously unmeaningful ranking system - all creating new parameters for being kicked out does is create new problems, rather than actually solving the existing ones.

I hadnt acually thought of that, you paint a very good picture, if that be the case then I disagree with removal from perg due to rank. Lores suggestion makes sense

[Wolf359]

I don't think anyone has mentioned this before (just looked, couldn't see) - but the fact it's so simple is probably the reason it's been overlooked!.......

Perg is there to supposedly help and build up the newer, weaker players. So - leave it as it stands currently - with one exception - make it so ascended accounts cannot enter perg...

... it's easy and it should be relatively quick to do. Anybody who has ascended cannot be counted as new or weak anymore because they have added bonuses and, if you do your ascension properly, you will have given somebody a stack of resources to hold for you before you ascended.

Simple.

Effective.

Easily implemented.

Make it so!

[Wolf359]

If you race change, you still have an ascended account tied to your main account - so you cannot enter perg. At the end of the day, race change is a choice (one that I've never been able to understand). If you descend or are descended - you cannot enter perg.

Seriously - this would mean that perg would actually do what it was meant to do - and it would also mean we'd be less likely to see accounts in perg in the top ranks - with very little downside.

[Lore]

If you race change, you still have an ascended account tied to your main account - so you cannot enter perg. At the end of the day, race change is a choice (one that I've never been able to understand). If you descend or are descended - you cannot enter perg.

Seriously - this would mean that perg would actually do what it was meant to do - and it would also mean we'd be less likely to see accounts in perg in the top ranks - with very little downside.

I find myself disagreeing with you Wolf. In theory yes, but in actuality this idea is not even close to being balanced.

Ex.
Acc A has 10 mill men, Rank 1000K, Top 100 MS, Unascended
Acc B has 1 mill men(all lifers), Rank 50K, No MS, ascended 1 time

Acc A is a new player whos raided their way up and has decent stats
Acc B is an older player who has returned to a decimated account with no units but lifers

Who needs purg more between these 2 accounts?

maybe lessen the max amount in purg per ascention?

1 ascention is normal boot cap
2 ascentions is 10% less before boot cap
3 ascentions is 20% less etc, etc, etc,

means the higher you are in ascention, the faster you have to leave purg.

[ChrOnO]

I agree, just reduce the cap limit. But in reducing it make sure that once in perg you can't grow to 50mil like some of the players there. Make the limit say 30mil then if you hit that you get kicked.

[Lore]

I agree, just reduce the cap limit. But in reducing it make sure that once in perg you can't grow to 50mil like some of the players there. Make the limit say 30mil then if you hit that you get kicked.

both the entry and the exit limits are dynamic and grow over time.

[ChrOnO]

yes I know but why not make them the same? this way you won't have players who are just under the limit going in and just growing another 20mil units before worrying about being in main again?

[Tacet]

1 ascention is normal boot cap
2 ascentions is 10% less before boot cap
3 ascentions is 20% less etc, etc, etc,

means the higher you are in ascention, the faster you have to leave purg.

I like Lore's idea most. One problem with just kicking all ascended players is that there are those who doesn't buy full SS before ascending. I know you can get it with 1001 GR points, but even so quite a lot of ppl ascend with very little the first time. Meaning that you get very weak Priors. Lore's idea assists those who build a small, well configured account with which they do ascension runs. Still assisting the small guy, but diminishing the exploitation.

Also - no GR in perg. I've seen it in quite a few perg related suggestions. Yet again, my vote is to take away any GR in perg. Glory, reputation... Bring back the meaning of the words.

[Wolf359]

If you race change, you still have an ascended account tied to your main account - so you cannot enter perg. At the end of the day, race change is a choice (one that I've never been able to understand). If you descend or are descended - you cannot enter perg.

Seriously - this would mean that perg would actually do what it was meant to do - and it would also mean we'd be less likely to see accounts in perg in the top ranks - with very little downside.

I find myself disagreeing with you Wolf. In theory yes, but in actuality this idea is not even close to being balanced.

Ex.
Acc A has 10 mill men, Rank 1000K, Top 100 MS, Unascended
Acc B has 1 mill men(all lifers), Rank 50K, No MS, ascended 1 time

Acc A is a new player whos raided their way up and has decent stats
Acc B is an older player who has returned to a decimated account with no units but lifers

Who needs purg more between these 2 accounts?

maybe lessen the max amount in purg per ascention?

1 ascention is normal boot cap
2 ascentions is 10% less before boot cap
3 ascentions is 20% less etc, etc, etc,

means the higher you are in ascention, the faster you have to leave purg.

I know what you mean - but the trouble with a lot of 'good ideas' in the past is that they have tried to be too clever and caused more problems than they solved. Which is why I tried to keep it simple - whether an ascended/experienced account has been decimated or not should not be the issue - it only becomes an issue because perg now exists.

[Lore]

The true problems with purg are the easy entry and exits. Purg should be a commitment much strictor then vacation as its a long term state of being.

Personally I think just a few easy implementations would make purg a viable option.

1. NO G&R, how can you gain "Glory and Reputation" hiding in purg?
2. Seperate ranking system (Potentialy causing more lag tho)Rank 1 purg account should not happen.
3. Make entry more thought out
A. No attacks in the last 24 to 48 hrs
B. Strip an presently held G&R
C. Force alliance leaves, you are going into purgatory and therefore hiding
D. Deal with the "personal" AT in purg
E. Create a set time limit before being expelled
F. for every 30 days you spend in purg you must wait 7 days before reentering purg. So if the limit is 90 days, and you spend the full 90 days, you must wait 21 days to reenter.
G. etc, etc, etc.....

as it is now purg is just another tactic handed to the gorrilla fighter, and those who basicly remain statless and untouchable.

[Zuveelee]

can i just say perg isnt just somewere that people go and hide there are alot of purg based alliances who fight eachother in perg wich is a good thing meening most of the time with a few exceptions it makes for a fair fight for new players keep perg

[Seaborgium]

The true problems with purg are the easy entry and exits. Purg should be a commitment much strictor then vacation as its a long term state of being.

Personally I think just a few easy implementations would make purg a viable option.

1. NO G&R, how can you gain "Glory and Reputation" hiding in purg?
2. Seperate ranking system (Potentialy causing more lag tho)Rank 1 purg account should not happen.
3. Make entry more thought out
A. No attacks in the last 24 to 48 hrs
B. Strip an presently held G&R
C. Force alliance leaves, you are going into purgatory and therefore hiding
D. Deal with the "personal" AT in purg
E. Create a set time limit before being expelled
F. for every 30 days you spend in purg you must wait 7 days before reentering purg. So if the limit is 90 days, and you spend the full 90 days, you must wait 21 days to reenter.
G. etc, etc, etc.....

as it is now purg is just another tactic handed to the gorrilla fighter, and those who basicly remain statless and untouchable.

1. i can agree
2. I disagree with seperate rankings, i like the idea of a rank auto boot. However if you take away the GnR then i doubt we see many top ranked in perg.
3. i agree entry does need more thought
A. i disagree with this due to smaller accounts being farmed, they hit back and most of the time get massed. So they would need to go to perg to regrow what they lost while hitting teh bigger person.
B. Why take it? they earned it in main. i say leave it
C. Don't understand this one
D. Deal how? You can't use them to get out, only attack while there.
E. well with the other things being set why this?
F. I like this idea of a "break" from perg

[Shadowarrior]

ok lets look at the math folks some one in perg can only have 70% of the total units some one in norm canhave so someone being ranked #1 in perg means extremmly bad managment for the players in norm so in other words play betterstop complaining...

[Lore]

Stop complaingthat soemone beat u all and got to #1 rank in perg, i think is a totally ridicullous idea perg by it self limits you to no person to person trades this means its more DANGEROUS THEN NORM (none of your buddies can help u rebuild)

You got to be kidding right? How can he beat anyone HIDING IN PURG WHERE HE CANT BE HIT? LOL.

More dangerous, thats funny there. Naq farming is better, UU raiding is better, and fewer active fighting accounts, hows that more dangerous?

1. i can agree
2. I disagree with seperate rankings, i like the idea of a rank auto boot. However if you take away the GnR then i doubt we see many top ranked in perg.
3. i agree entry does need more thought
A. i disagree with this due to smaller accounts being farmed, they hit back and most of the time get massed. So they would need to go to perg to regrow what they lost while hitting teh bigger person.
B. Why take it? they earned it in main. i say leave it
C. Don't understand this one
D. Deal how? You can't use them to get out, only attack while there.
E. well with the other things being set why this?
F. I like this idea of a "break" from perg

2. I don't like rank based autokick. It favors the farmers dramaticly. It keeps defenses lower to stop autokick, and its also not player based. A server war could push several players out of purg.
A. whats more important? making a decimated account wait 24 hrs to enter purg? or stopping cowards who mass/take planets and then run to purg knowing they can't be followed?
B. I can go either way
C. Forcing an alliance leave stops the protection of "inactive" accounts in purg as their CO/Alliance can see their UU count and when its ripe for farming, and see all their att logs and can hunt those farming the inactive account.
D. just reveiw it and if its fair then
E. is an alternative, not saying all these should be implimented.